sk7326

I'd put it this way - the Price deal has "not" worked out ... that is, this was a below-median outcome for his first 3 years. That said, if a "bad" outcome is that he is more a fringy 2/excellent #3, that's not shabby.

The question is what Sale's durability concerns do to his market. Will someone really give him 6 years. Boston should have no qualms about offering a very lucrative, short-ish deal. (3 years, $100-$110M) There are some tax concerns - but they are Henry profitability concerns more than baseball ones.

Pitcher: Hector Velasquez. This is not difficult. The Red Sox have asked him to do a lot of things, and he has been consistently very effective. Given his stuff, I worry about whether it will continue to hold up, but he deserves this. Position: Moreland/Pearce. The tag team has allowed them to have a very productive 1B position for considerably less money than him and Ramirez. It has not been sexy but it has been very effective - and on a team which has had trouble getting offense from C and 2B for a lot of the season, the depth helped.

I think what people got sick of was Buchholz lack of durability and very high variability. That he has been good for Arizona is not a surprise - he has always had elite stuff. And he has always had elite stretches.

Martinez was a victim of Pujols contract. Yeah, Martinez did not have background in 1B like Pujols did, but there is no doubt that they could put him at 1B if it came down to it.

The trick with San Antonio is that Austin is 80 miles away - and combined there is some potential there. I am hesitant to put a team in Florida given the Rays' struggles. Portland is not a terrible idea. In my fantasy though North Carolina is the natural place for the Rays to move to.

I think Austin/San Antonio could clearly support a team. Vegas might (and I am generally hesitant as a baseball fan to have another elevation driven launching pad). If there were no territorial issues, Brooklyn would be an obvious candidate. It is hard to say the Expos fan base was bad because they reacted poorly to how horribly baseball treated them - between the Loria reign, getting rid of their French radio outlet, the 3-way franchise deal with Boston and Miami, and then the league running them as a ward of the state. IF they had ownership that was committed to actually serving that community it could (Would) very well work out.

The Angels knew the last years would stink - they were just hoping the early years (3 years) would be enough along with a gradual decline. That didn't happen.

Really the "worst deal" (as hyperbolic as that is) is from Allen Craig's rotting corpse.

1. No - but I'd curb it ... see below 2. No 3. Yes, Yes, Yes 4. No 5. Yes - sort of ... expand the rosters to 28 players, but only 25 active in a given game. One of the inactive players is a pitcher - who can be activated if a game goes extras 6. With the 6 mound visits a game, this is probably not necessary. 7. Not sure this is that important ... the review process should be tightened for sure 8. I like the idea of just stealing what the NHL does (especially if we go 4 divisions) - two 3 inning semifinals and a 3 inning final ... 16-man rosters for each division. Obviously with #1, that'd involve yada-yada'ing away territorial monopolies, but since we're dreaming: - Move the A's to San Jose (where they've wanted to go all along) - Move Tampa somewhere else. I'd suggest somewhere in North Carolina. - Expand to Austin/San Antonio, Bring back Les Expos DIVISIONS: AL East: BOS, NYY, TOR, BAL, NC, CLE, DET, CHW AL West: TEX, HOU, ANA, SJ, SEA, KC, MIN, MIL NL East: ATL, WAS, NYM, MIA, PHI, PIT, CIN, MON NL West: SA, LA, SF, COL, ARI, SD, CHC, STL 12 games in division, 9 games cross division Interleague is 6 games ... NYY-NYM, TOR-MTL, BAL-WAS, CLE-CIN, CHW-CHC, ANA-LA, SJ-SF, KC-STL, Rotate HOU/TEX-SA are locked in, the other 8 matchups rotate (or maybe have a lottery drawing) Brand the interleague games collectively - you know, like the "Dodge, AL/NL showdown" or something cheesy like that. The league that wins it gets the home field in the WS.

He has made a clear contact for power sort of tradeoff and it has worked - even if it is more XBH than homeruns purely. Also - it helps to be able to grip the bat properly.

Red Sox have four of the major's Top 20 position players in fWAR and its #1 pitcher (despite pitching 20 fewer innings than any of his compatriots)

WAR is more directionally accurate than precisely accurate. Now what is a 17% error. Think of it this way. If a player registered 6 wins above replacement - that is actual measured performance. It is true. Now, does that mean he is a 6-win player? No. THAT is where the range of error kicks in. Similary if a player goes 3 for 10, is he REALLY a .300 hitter? No. Heck, even at 80 at-bats (a 24 for 80 stretch) you are still looking at a spread between .198 and .402. Get to 160 at-bats and it's .228 to .372. Once you take that sort of sampling into account - a 17% spread is actually pretty good. It's not the 6.0 WAR which is "wrong" - it is exactly what its components say it is, but what it says about the underlying contribution of the player. If you look at the AL fWAR rankings it tells you the obvious - the AL MVP is a 4 man race between Ramirez, Lindor, Trout and Betts. I'd pick Betts but none of those 4 are bad choices.

We're 2-2 vs the Astros.

In terms of the rules - you'd expect the AL to have an advantage (even if it is small and very noisy). For the most part, ALL pitchers suck at hitting ... and the AL is almost always sitting a better player in the NL park than the NL is serving up to be an AL DH.

Rubber armed Wade Davis pitched 72 and 67 innings in both of the Royals' World Series runs, roughly an inning per appearance ... The last sentence of the post misspelled Keith Foulke (who exceeded Davis' inning total and innings per appearance every year through 2004, and it is hard to forget his damn near heroic postseason)

Since there is a formal strike zone in the rules, by definition there is a truth. I agree with the spirit of some of this. What this can eliminate is umps showboating and attacking players in the name of protecting a call they most likely missed.

Oh I agree - I was just saying because we see it on TV and Pitch FX exists, doesn't mean that this is suddenly capable of happening next year (even if it were negotiated).

Whenever I find myself thinking that - I double back and recognize I am old.

I started a new thread clarifying my thoughts on this.

That is a fair question. I think you have to look at the pitching staff this way for October. 1. Sale. You expect to get 6+ good innings from him. If you don't, you're not winning much of anything. 2/3. Porcello and Price. You'd like to get 6 innings - but you're really planning for two trips through the order. 4. Eovaldi. You want to get 2 trips through the order, but you plan for 1. 5-6. Rodriguez, Johnson as multi-inning bridges. They are there to back up a bad performance. More helpfully, you'd like to have him ready for being able to get through the order once and then on to the 1-inning dudes. 7. Kimbrel is the closer 8-11. Barnes, Kelly, Velasquez and Workman Now looking at the position players OF: Benintendi, Betts, Bradley, Martinez SS: Bogaerts 2B: Kinsler, Holt 1B: Moreland, Pierce 3B: Devers, Nunez C: Leon, Vaszquez/Swihart So we have 13 position players. The question becomes whether you want to carry another pitcher - or do you add a 14th position player. Do you make a trade for a Quinton Berry designated PR sort? Or do you try to find another outfielder for defensive flexibility? Would you rather add, say, Rusney Castillo in pursuit of both goals?

Right - the pitcher is trying to get you to pull it. It is harder than it seems. You still should try here and there, but it is what it is.

He has been death against lefthanders the last 2 seasons. Put him in the 'pen where he can be a viable multi inning bridge guy, and you've given Cora more ways to navigate those October starts where the hooks will be a lot quicker. All the charm of a LOOGY while actually being able to do a little bit more.

Francisco Liriano makes sense - Dombrowski looked into it before the deadline, makes sense to follow through on it.

I don't see much evidence of that. Frankly, I am surprised teams did not do this more in the olden days - it was right there.